Poll: Fox Hunting

Do you support proposed amendments or repeal of the Hunting Act?

  • Yes, I think the Act should be repealed.

    Votes: 106 20.1%

  • Yes, I think E&W should come in line with Scotland.

    Votes: 35 6.6%

  • No, I think the Act should not be altered.

    Votes: 387 73.3%
  • Total voters
    528
Leave as is. It'll never be voted back in anyway, regardless of a "free vote".

Nearly ran one of the hounds over in my village last year. Bunch of hunt spectators stood around next to the road didn't see fit to warn me of the dogs about to cross (I had no idea what they were all stood around for), nor did they seem to react at all to me nearly taking the poor beast out. *****.
 
I hate all hunters with a passion, usually people with severe personality disorders who simply enjoy killing for the fun of it.

Nobody can convince me that killing any animal for fun is a thing a normal person would do.
 
Moses said:
It's hilarious when people spack out on Facebook/social media/here about evil Tories wanting fox hunting back... when in reality they just want a free vote...
Click to expand...

Surely at least a vocal minority want it back to want a free vote on the issue?
 
I'd rather be the fox who lived wild and free for my whole life, only to be killed in a day for sport, than the chicken who lived in a hutch for its whole life only to be killed in a day for food.

Neither is necessary in 2015. People trying to suggest there is no equivalence between eating meat and hunting are lying to themselves.
 
Moses said:
I thought that obvious. Of course some Tories, individually, want it back. The point is the party isn't pushing it/won't whip its members/etc.

And individual MPs (or parties) can want a vote but not want a change - they can just think it's right to have a chance to decide. Like how the Greens are pro an EU referendum, but want to remain in the EU.
Click to expand...

So do we think it is a vocal minority or a majority of Tory MPs who support change to the act?
 
I'm indifferent to the argument for or against it but I do sympathise with all the people who campaigned successfully to get it banned for many years who now may face it all over again.
 
Should stay as it is, they don't need to ride around with their toft friends and 20 dogs to rip up a fox.

Honestly...what is wrong with these people...

Thompson_NCL said:
I'd rather be the fox who lived wild and free for my whole life, only to be killed in a day for sport, than the chicken who lived in a hutch for its whole life only to be killed in a day for food.

Neither is necessary in 2015. People trying to suggest there is no equivalence between eating meat and hunting are lying to themselves.
Click to expand...

There is quite a big difference (At least if it's to do with fox hunting), one is for food (also if it follows regulations should be killed appropriately) the other is to hang with your ******* mates and watch something get torn to shreds whilst still alive.
 
Last edited:
Thompson_NCL said:
I'd rather be the fox who lived wild and free for my whole life, only to be killed in a day for sport, than the chicken who lived in a hutch for its whole life only to be killed in a day for food.

Neither is necessary in 2015. People trying to suggest there is no equivalence between eating meat and hunting are lying to themselves.
Click to expand...

Happen to agree with this, generally. Though the fox one is a bit different in terms of the lack of any usefulness in the death (ghoulish entertainment aside).

My neighbour is involved with the local shoot - he regularly provides me with ducks and pheasant in the shooting season (can't say I much enjoy the butchering, but it's cool to get lots of free meat). Those birds have a much better time of it than do the chickens that end up on your dinner plate - they live longer and spend a decent proportion of it entirely free and wild. Some even escape the guns and live beyond the season.
 
CREATIVE!11 said:
There is quite a big difference (At least if it's to do with fox hunting), one is for food (also if it follows regulations should be killed appropriately) the other is to hang with your ******* mates and watch something get torn to shreds whilst still alive.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

To me I don't like hunting. If you eat what you hunt, I suppose it isn't so much different from eating meat from a chicken. But those who go out, kill an innocent animal without any reason other than for fun, it shouldn't be allowed. We wouldn't get away with hunting down a helpless human for fun, so why should it be allowed for an animal?
 
The ban was undemocratic when introduced because it was mostly unpopular in the countryside (the place where the foxes are) yet popular in the cities (where the are very little foxes) however I think it would be undemocratic to just repeal it.

Maybe a better idea would be to devolve it to country councils, that way it can be banned/legal at the country level which would be a much better system, as it can be illegal in cities and keep the bleeding heart townies happy, and it can be legal in areas where foxes are causing a menace.

I personally don't like the idea of using dogs to hunt foxes, however I do realise that something has to be done to get fox numbers back under control.
 
ubersonic said:
I personally don't like the idea of using dogs to hunt foxes, however I do realise that something has to be done to get fox numbers back under control.
Click to expand...

My father in law is a free-range chicken farmer (approx 12,000 birds, eggs not meat). His farm is on the edge of a small town, backing onto woodlands. Foxes are barely a problem at all.

Very occasionally, he'll set a fox trap and get the fox man in to finish the poor *******, but it's not a significant worry.

I saw so many more foxes when I lived in Bristol compared with the rest of my life spent out in the sticks or small town. And the hunts don't go through the cities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom